The CWA finally gave an answer as to why the standstill is being held with insurance. Their argument is 3-4 million per year is being credited to the company to help pay for supplemental insurance offered to the spouses of employees that have an opportunity to get insurance from their own employer. The CWA argues that the company is making 3-4 million a year off of employees because they of this. This argument is a false narrative to help them explain why they are still on strike. This is argument shows that the CWA bargaining team is way over their heads in their roles. Many of them are former wire tech employees and are now career union business associates. They have gotten the CWA into a position that they cannot settle without showing like a failure. The problem is the average union worker is going to be the one caught in the crossfire. Like Captain Ahab seeking out the great white whale to his death, this CWA leadership team is gone out of their way in ignorance to continue “fight” a losing battle.
36 replies (most recent on top)
Maybe they should make another donation GoFundMe site for their spouses.
The D3 negotiating team made it a topic with their new-math update last night.
Work the math backwards. Let's assume it's true for the sake of argument. $4.1m divided by $115 per month divided by 12 months is about 3,000 employee spouses. So 3,000 spouses are eligible for health coverage from their own employer, but they choose to use AT&T's instead... hence the surcharge. No company, AT&T included, would be expected to just take it and absorb those costs...not if they want to stay in business.
But they are giving employees the choice. Also, there is no surcharge if the spouse doesn't have their own coverage, which is entirely fair. Also, the company is not pocketing the money as some kind of profit. It goes back to to support the overall cost of providing healthcare benefits for everyone. Which is also fair.
If my spouse is added to my plan, I then automatically pay more(for family coverage) than I would for single coverage, obviously.
Companies do not want to pay for people they don't have to, especially companies like T which self-insure. They want to make it as unattractive as possible for someone to turn down their own job's insurance to ride on the coverage of their spouses. And more companies are eliminating the option of employee+spouse and just offering either employee-only or whole-family to further dissuade covering non-employee spouses. It is almost always not worth it to cover a spouse who has access to insurance through their own employer with the additional premiums if it's just emp+spouse. It might be worth it if you've got a few kids or chronic conditions, but when that's the case, a lot of times just the increased premium may not cover all the claims. Without the surcharge, an employee with a spouse and 3 kids would basically be getting the spouse for "free" with no 'penalty' for the spouse not taking advantage of their offered coverage.
Ok help me understand…..the $115/month “surcharge”…. The union says T is pocketing the money, T says they use it to help pay for the coverage. If my spouse is added to my plan, I then automatically pay more(for family coverage) than I would for single coverage, obviously. Is the surcharge necessary for something else or is it indeed a scam charge?
I think this is a made up post. Somebody is just trying to get something started. I doubt the strike is continuing over the spouse benefit. That makes no sense whatsoever.
The D3 negotiating team made it a topic with their new-math update last night.
I think this is a made up post. Somebody is just trying to get something started. I doubt the strike is continuing over the spouse benefit. That makes no sense whatsoever.
It's up to you to het the booster for Covid. I'm protected, but you can't protect me from what you have with what I got for what you haven't taken.
No one is forcing a spouse to take Att insurance when their own company offers it. Why shouldn’t pay more?
Protect yourself. Protect your family. Get vaccinated.
COVID is still around and relevant
“District 3 & this is formerly Bellsouth. We never had to pay for Insurance before AT&T.
This is absolutely not true. I started with BellSouth in 1994 and we have always paid for health insurance. My spouse was employed elsewhere and carried insurance there because it was cheaper than the increased rate for mine. Only added on mine as secondary when we had kids bc kids were covered under mine due to the birthday rule.”
If memory serves me correct D3 started paying on healthcare 1 or 2 contracts prior to the merger which would’ve put it about 00-05-ish.
Make sure you revisit that spouse thing if needed. Not sure it's all the same as a few years ago. But kids can be covered if they're under 26 regardless of whether they can get it through employer. Just pay for family coverage and you're good.
https://www.healthcare.gov/young-adults/children-under-26/
Generally, you can join a parent’s plan and stay on until you turn 26 even if you:
Get married
Have or adopt a child
Start or leave school
Live in or out of your parent’s home
Aren’t claimed as a tax dependent
Turn down an offer of job-based coverage
If you’re covered by a parent’s job-based plan, your coverage usually ends when you turn 26. But check with the employer or plan. Some states and plans have different rules.
Crazy part is sometimes if the covered dependent has a child, the dependent can be covered, but the new child can't. Disclaimer: I have no idea what AT&T's rules are on this, and it doesn't apply to me, so I'm not going to try to figure it out.
New variant out , virulent and needs new booster
Recently my daughter started working and I got a letter in the mail asking if she was getting insurance or able to get insurance from her company that she works for so the insurance companies definitely talk to each other about this.
The letter I got just asked are they currently covered by other insurance, not are they eligible. And kids under 26 are in a different class since they can be covered under parents regardless of their own employer's insurance. Last time I asked a couple years ago, there was also some contingency based on whether the spouse's coverage was free or came at a charge.
I've got news for you ever since Obamacare every company has been charging their employees for their spouses health care if that spouse has a job and that company can provide them Healthcare. Recently my daughter started working and I got a letter in the mail asking if she was getting insurance or able to get insurance from her company that she works for so the insurance companies definitely talk to each other about this.
I was not told I was getting paid any OT for my CP assignment!
Social distancing saves lives. Double mask please
“Company savings of 5 million a day in wages 20 days 100 million and no contract because of 3.5 million”
The $5m a day might be close but you are forget about paying the contractors and management OT to get the work done. Not to mention security due to the concern of violence at the work centers. These costs are far exceeding any savings in wages for the union. If any of this was about $3.5m, as you suggest, it would be settled by now. If the union would have accepted 18-20% increase in wages over the next five years and minimal increases in health care it would be settled by now as well.
Get tested! Remember, no symptoms are a symptom. Please wash your hands and get your boosters.
District 3 & this is formerly Bellsouth. We never had to pay for Insurance before AT&T.
This is absolutely not true. I started with BellSouth in 1994 and we have always paid for health insurance. My spouse was employed elsewhere and carried insurance there because it was cheaper than the increased rate for mine. Only added on mine as secondary when we had kids bc kids were covered under mine due to the birthday rule.
I will have to say there is some misinformation on the comments but not the post. I am in District 3 & this is formerly Bellsouth. We never had to pay for Insurance before AT&T. I do happen to know that the information in the post is very true and accurate. The company is out to sc--w everyone just so they can keep the profit margins up & keep shareholders happy.!!!
If you take it, you won't catch it....ooops!
If you take it, you can't spread it....ooops!
Would we lie to you!?!
Company savings of 5 million a day in wages 20 days 100 million and no contract because of 3.5 million
Lots of folks still here who remember that it would be a cold day in h€ll before we paid a penny out of pocket for healthcare, yet here we are. My how far we’ve declined in the last 20-25 years.
Must be more than 20-25 because I've been here 30+, and it's never been free. I don't love high-deductibles, but I like not having to pay a stupid copay every time I walked in a door, especially if I was feeling cr-ppy enough to go to the doctor.
" Lots of folks still here who remember that it would be a cold day in h€ll before we paid a penny out of pocket for healthcare, yet here we are. My how far we’ve declined in the last 20-25 years."
This is the kind of mindset we are dealing with here. As a non-bargained for employee of 25+ years, sure, I too long for the days back when I started of cheap and comprehensive HMO coverage and $10 co-pays that basically covered everything. That ship sailed a long, long time ago. I am no sycophant by any stretch of the imagination, yet I am able to understand why that is no longer possible. Things have change at a macro level that prevents most any large company from being able to offer that type of benefit anymore. Your "Cadillac" healthcare plan days are also over. You need to buck up and accept that and kick in more, like everyone else.
Now, T leadership--please just don't P on my leg and tell me it's raining is all that I ask. Don't talk to me about how you are offering me industry leading, best in class healthcare benefits when they are in fact worst in class, expensive, HDHP catastrophic coverage only, garbage.
haha, beat me to it.
Someone posted this on another thread, and it's a good call on the misrepresentation of healthcare costs by CWA.
@1vzm+1uuojK4H
the company has sc--wed us out of ~$8m in 2023
It's fuzzy math. Those surcharges aren't being "pocketing." That money is being used to pay the claims for employee spouses who could get other coverage but choose not to. The surcharge is bc AT&T is paying the primary coverage rates instead of the secondary--so the main meal instead of just drinks or dessert. It's a choice--the employee's spouse has the option to NOT pay the surcharge by using their own employer's insurance instead of AT&T. Soo..if your spouse can get their work insurance for $115 or less, they'd be d-mb to pay the surcharge unless their plan doesn't cover squat. Again, it's a choice made by each employee and spouse.
Also... AT&T doesn't get any money from COB. The additional coverage is paid to the providers, not AT&T.
What a false narrative by CWA.
A response from another thread:
the company has sc--wed us out of ~$8m in 2023
It's fuzzy math. Those surcharges aren't being "pocketing." That money is being used to pay the claims for employee spouses who could get other coverage but choose not to. The surcharge is bc AT&T is paying the primary coverage rates instead of the secondary--so the main meal instead of just drinks or dessert. It's a choice--the employee's spouse has the option to NOT pay the surcharge by using their own employer's insurance instead of AT&T. Soo..if your spouse can get their work insurance for $115 or less, they'd be d-mb to pay the surcharge unless their plan doesn't cover squat. Again, it's a choice made by each employee and spouse.
Also... AT&T doesn't get any money from COB. The additional coverage is paid to the providers, not AT&T.
….when you shine the light the roaches run.
And make no mistake, the longer the strike continues, the easier it will be for them to get their members to accept a cr-ppy deal while feeling like they won.
A video camera and a nightly YouTube upload would solve a lot of this.
This is a good one. Will never happen as they're not there negotiating or fighting for employees/members, they're planning on how they can sc#ew everyone over while making it look like they have found some great compromise. Both sides.
“
I remember 20 years ago how good insurance was there, when I was a housewife. Not so great anymore. Started a job about a decade ago and he was faced with the insurance thing. I'm covered if I'm at home, but not in the workplace? What if I worked somewhere cr-ppy where the insurance was basically my wages? Then I'd have stayed on his insurance but we'd be penalized because I was... trying to be sneaky? I also wish they had insurance for 2 people. The 2 of us should be cheaper to insure than a full minivan.
Appreciate you guys. There are a few great threads in here each week while Hubs waits to see if he draws the short straw for CP.”
Lots of folks still here who remember that it would be a cold day in h€ll before we paid a penny out of pocket for healthcare, yet here we are. My how far we’ve declined in the last 20-25 years.
We are in desperate need of the straight up truth with no spin from both sides concerning so many things. Nobody trusts T, many are starting to not trust the U. A video camera and a nightly YouTube upload would solve a lot of this.
I remember 20 years ago how good insurance was there, when I was a housewife. Not so great anymore. Started a job about a decade ago and he was faced with the insurance thing. I'm covered if I'm at home, but not in the workplace? What if I worked somewhere cr-ppy where the insurance was basically my wages? Then I'd have stayed on his insurance but we'd be penalized because I was... trying to be sneaky? I also wish they had insurance for 2 people. The 2 of us should be cheaper to insure than a full minivan.
Appreciate you guys. There are a few great threads in here each week while Hubs waits to see if he draws the short straw for CP.
So sue us!
American Thieves and Thugs are all about the honesty and breaches.